Bonnington Hotel Ordered to Pay €26,000 for ‘Sham Redundancy’ After Carpenter’s Unfair Dismissal

Bonnington Hotel Ordered to Pay €26,000 for ‘Sham Redundancy’ After Carpenter’s Unfair Dismissal

Introduction

In a landmark ruling, the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has ordered the operators of Dublin’s Bonnington Hotel to pay €26,000 in compensation to former carpenter Donal Finnegan, after finding that his redundancy was a “sham” and his dismissal unfair and unlawful.

This case highlights the importance of following fair redundancy procedures and respecting employee rights under Irish employment law.


Case Background

Mr Finnegan began working for the McGettigan family in June 2018 and moved to the Bonnington Hotel in October 2018.

On July 4, 2024, he was called into a meeting with HR coordinator Shane Mealaugh, where he was informed that due to “financial difficulties,” his position was being made redundant. His employment officially ended on August 8, 2024.

However, evidence later showed that the redundancy process lacked transparency, and Mr Finnegan was never properly consulted or given a chance to respond to the decision.


WRC Findings

Adjudicator John Harraghy ruled that the redundancy was not genuine and labelled the process as:

“A sham redundancy, executed in a manner that was both ruthless and dishonest, with no regard for the personal impact on the complainant.”

Key findings included:

  • The hotel failed to follow fair redundancy procedures.
  • Mr Finnegan was not warned or consulted about potential redundancies.
  • No objective selection criteria were provided.
  • No alternative employment within the hotel was considered.
  • The hotel failed to provide supporting financial evidence to justify the redundancy.
  • No key witnesses from the hotel attended the WRC hearing.

As a result, the WRC concluded that the dismissal was neither valid nor fair.


Compensation Awarded

Liffeyfield Ltd, which operates the Bonnington Hotel, was ordered to pay:

  • €26,000 compensation for unfair dismissal (including €8,002 redundancy already paid).
  • An additional €3,440 for failing to provide a written contract under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994.

Why This Case Matters

This ruling serves as a reminder to employers that redundancy cannot be used as a pretext for dismissal. Fair procedures, transparency, and proper documentation are essential to avoid costly disputes.

For employees, this case reinforces the importance of knowing your rights and seeking legal advice if you suspect unfair dismissal.


Need Advice on Redundancy or Unfair Dismissal?

At Employment Matters, we help employees and employers navigate redundancy disputes and protect their legal rights.

📞 Contact us today for a confidential consultation.

Not Sure If You’re Ready?
Talk to Us First.